Thursday, July 12, 2012

"The Amazing Spider-Man"

The pointlessness of this film (much like the pointlessness of Bruce Banner's dad as a villain in Hulk) is just too much for me.

When I first heard about the reboot of Spider-Man, I
reacted the same way many fans did: I wondered what the point was.After all, it had only been ten years since
the superhero franchise had started and it had been a mere five years since the
last entry in that trilogy.Why on earth
would they need to tell this origin story again?As the hype built and footage was released, I
started to lighten up.After all, the
Batman franchise had rebooted eight years after the last entry.Maybe this Spider-Man (with the vastly
different title, The Amazing Spider-Man) would try to reinvent the hero and
tell new stories in a different style.As it turns out, my initial fears were legitimate.The Amazing Spider-Man is extremely similar
to the Tobey Maguire-Sam Raimi film in terms of plot and action.It truly felt like a less fun remake rather
than a daring reimagining.

Is it really fair to judge a movie based on whatever form of
a “re-“ it is?I suppose not, but how
can you ignore how pointless it all is?Sure, people were upset with the third Spider-Man film, but did they
need to start over and tell the exact same origin story?I’ll try to judge this film on its own merits
as much as possible, but this film kind of has to be judged in comparison to
the original.

Origin stories in general are a little boring, especially
when you already know what’s going to happen.Look at the popular consensus of the latest Batman, X-Men, and
Spider-Man films.The first films are
well-received because they are necessary.Even though most people know the backgrounds of these decades-old
heroes, we accept that they must be introduced.The second film in all of these franchises has been regarded as the best
because we can just enjoy the character and not have to deal with that first
hour of the character figuring things out.The point of all this is that Spider-Man didn’t need to be introduced
again.It hasn’t been that long so
people could probably handle the idea of Peter Parker already being
Spider-Man.

The Amazing Spider-Man hints at telling a new story only
to devolve into identical territory.We
get glimpses of Peter Parker’s parents, but it’s a missed opportunity.Instead of delving into the mystery of his
parents, we see Peter in high school…again, taking pictures…again, getting
bullied…again, and…well, everything you saw ten years ago…again.Why?

The Amazing Spider-Man would also have you believe that
this is a different, darker Peter Parker.Nothing against Andrew Garfield; he makes for a fine Spider-Man, but the
character isn’t written differently.Sure, the tone of this film is a bit darker, but it’s not a major
shift.Peter still has moments of
depression, anger, and happiness.If
anything, I thought Peter was a bit quicker to get over death in this version,
which is odd.

Okay, so the story and the tone are not different enough,
then what about the action?Once again,
the small changes simply don’t warrant the existence of this film.Sam Raimi did a fine job of filming Spidey as
he swung throughout New York City.Director Marc Webb dabbled with some first person point of view
sequences for this film.But even though
an early trailer contained a full first person sequence, the final film only
used bits and pieces.Perhaps that was
because the early footage was awful and looked like a subpar videogame rather
than a big budget film.

All of the above complaining is not to say that this is
terrible movie, though.Just a pointless
one.The acting is fine, though no one
really stands out.The film has some
intense sequences and a few laughs, including the best Stan Lee cameo yet.Honestly, if this film had been released back
in 2002, I probably would have really liked it.But compared to the film that did come out in ’02, it is definitely the
lesser effort.

This film pales in comparison to the original for many
reasons.First, the villain.It’s all well and good to bring out the
Lizard in the first film, especially since he was only hinted at in the
previous films, but there’s a reason he was never truly introduced: he looks
goofy…and he’s downright ridiculous when he talks.The Lizard might work in the comic books, but
he’s just too cartoonish for film.

Next, the romance.I
kind of bought the chemistry between Peter and Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), but it
is paper thin.They basically get
together in this film because they are both awkward around each other and just
have a “feeling.”That seemed lazy to me
while the Peter and Mary Jane relationship in the original had a bit more meat
to it.

Finally, the tone.This film wants to be the darker, more realistic of the two franchises,
but it just ends up being messy.Peter
goes from funny to depressed to vengeful to righteous in about ten
minutes.At least the original knew what
it wanted to be and it was all the more fun because of it.

You may read this and completely disagree with me.Maybe I am wrong and people really wanted a
new Spider-Man.If that’s the case,
enjoy it while I just put in my Maguire-Raimi Spider-Man DVD.I think quite a few of you will agree with
me, though.I would tell you to avoid
this obvious studio cash grab, but it doesn’t matter.The film has already made plenty of money
(including some from me).Maybe you can
find solace in the fact that you’re not alone in disliking this film.Or better yet, you actually did skip it and I’ve
just confirmed your fear that this movie would be pointless.I hope that’s the case, then at least I can
feel some satisfaction from having sat through this unfortunate movie.

Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

Just to ease up a bit, this movie isn't bad, it's just so unnecessary. I was glad to see that they didn't attempt to bring a new Jameson, since J. K. Simmons was so great in that role.

I also liked that they went with the web pellets rather than making it a weird bodily secretion.

And finally, this movie does look better, but only because it's ten years later, not because the filmmakers were more skilled.